Skip to content
CQC ExplainedEvery inspection report, in plain English

CQC report explained · a residential care home, run by Avocet Trust

Green Lane Farm

22 Highside, North Frodingham, YO25 8LQ

Goodpublished 15 December 2023, 2 years ago

Rated Good: inspectors found the service performing well and meeting their expectations.

The five questions inspectors ask
Safe?
Good
Inspectors found suitable risk assessments, enough staff, safe recruitment, safe medicines systems and effective infection control. They suggested more complete recording of reflections and lessons learned after incidents.
Effective?
Good
People's needs were assessed before admission and care plans covered their needs and goals. Staff supported communication, healthcare, nutrition and decision-making in line with the Mental Capacity Act.
Caring?
Good
This area was not inspected during this visit. The report says its previous rating was used in calculating the overall rating.
Responsive?
Good
This area was not inspected during this visit. The report says its previous rating was used in calculating the overall rating.
Well-led?
Good
Inspectors found effective oversight, good staff relationships and systems to monitor the service and improve care. People, relatives and staff were involved and communication was described as good.
The latest report, explained

What inspectors found, December 2023

Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and person-centred care, with only minor improvements suggested for record-keeping.

The inspection took place on 26, 27 and 29 October, and 20 November 2023. One inspector visited the home and the provider's head office. They spoke with people, staff and relatives, and reviewed care, medicine and management records.

The home was rated Good overall. Safe, Effective and Well-led were all rated Good. Inspectors found enough suitable staff, safe medicines practice, suitable risk assessments, good infection control and support for people to make choices and take part in activities.

The home supported people's communication, health needs and decisions. Staff knew people well and relatives described communication and care positively. Inspectors discussed recording lessons from incidents more fully, and gave guidance about best practice for one health condition and covert medicines. The medicines issue was addressed during the inspection.

This was not a full inspection of all five areas. Caring and Responsive were not inspected, so their previous ratings were used when calculating the overall rating. The previous overall rating was Good.

What inspectors praised

  • Activities and choice

    People were supported to choose activities, follow their interests and access the local community. Staff also supported people to make decisions and used the least restrictive approach.

    “Staff supported people to take part in activities and pursue their interests in their local area.” from the report

  • Staffing and safety

    Inspectors found enough staff with suitable recruitment checks. Staff supported people safely, including when they were out in the community or taking part in activities.

    “The service had enough staff. If required the registered manager and other staff were flexible to cover shifts to ensure people's needs were met.” from the report

  • Communication and individual support

    Staff understood how people communicated and used tools such as pictures, cards and Makaton where needed. Care plans described each person's communication needs.

    “People had communication support plans which described exactly how people communicated.” from the report

  • Kind and respectful care

    Inspectors saw positive relationships between people and staff. Relatives said people were treated safely, respectfully and with compassion.

    “We saw people and staff laughing and joking together, playing games, and singing songs.” from the report

  • Leadership

    The manager had a clear understanding of people's needs and effective oversight of the home. Staff shared the service's person-centred approach.

    “The registered manager had effective oversight of the service.” from the report
What inspectors were concerned about

  • Incident records could be fuller

    minor

    Incidents were reported, investigated and reviewed. However, inspectors said the records did not always capture reflections and lessons learned in enough detail.

    “We discussed how the registered manager could record reflections on incidents and any lessons learnt in a more comprehensive way.” from the report
Questions to ask them, based on this report
  1. 01How do you record and act on lessons learned after accidents or incidents?
  2. 02How will you support my relative's particular communication needs, including any use of pictures, cards or Makaton?
  3. 03How do you support people during periods of distress while keeping restrictions to a minimum?
  4. 04How do you review medicines, including any covert medicines, and promote the person's independence?
  5. 05What evidence can you share about the Caring and Responsive areas, which were not inspected during this visit?

This was a focused inspection of Safe, Effective and Well-led only; Caring and Responsive were not inspected and their previous ratings carried over to the overall rating. This explanation was written from the published report of 15 December 2023 by an AI system and checked against the report text: every quoted line appears in the report. It is a guide to the report, not a substitute for it. Read the full report on cqc.org.uk.

The story over the years

Every inspection of Green Lane Farm

2 rated inspections over 6 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.

  1. December 2023Goodcurrent ratingstayed Good
    Safe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good

    Read what inspectors found at Green Lane Farm →

  2. November 2017Good
    Safe: GoodEffective: GoodWell-led: Good

    We are reading this report · the original is on cqc.org.uk

  3. December 2016

    Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 9 December 2016.

Ratings and report dates from the Care Quality Commission. A service can also be visited without a new rating being published, so the timeline shows published inspections, not every contact the CQC has had with the service.

Another option

Or stay at home with a private carer

Many people who look at care homes end up staying at home with a carer who comes in for a few hours a day, or lives in. PrimeCarers introduces you to self-employed carers you choose yourself: interviewed, ID and DBS checked, from about £20 an hour or £1,120 a week live-in.

About live-in careHow PrimeCarers works
Same provider

Other services run by Avocet Trust

10 other services on the CQC register. A pattern across a group tells you more than one report.

Nearby

Other care homes near North Frodingham

All in East Riding of Yorkshire

The Granary

Driffield, YO25 · 5.8 km
Good
Residential
Rated 7 years agocare home

Cranswick Lodge

Hutton Cranswick, YO25 · 8.0 km
Requires improvement
ResidentialDementia
Rated 3 years agocare home

Woodlands Care Home

Driffield, YO25 · 8.4 km
Requires improvement
ResidentialDementia
Rated 3 years agocare home